Let's see, the complaint is that the D3300 has lots of features, many of which weren't even in film SLRs a decade ago. So how dare anyone call it entry level?
The problem here is low self-esteem on the part of the D3300 owner, not the term "entry level." The D3300 is currently Nikon's entry DSLR: the lowest specified camera with the fewest features. The assumption is that users get more sophisticated over time and migrate up to higher level models.
To be offended by the nomenclature here shows that you're not entirely confident of your own abilities. I'll man up to it: I've shot with a D3300 and liked it. I'm certainly not entry level.
It always amazes me how much ego people put into the products they own. "Hey, I drive a Corvette, I must be sexy" or "I've got a bigger TV than my neighbors." Stop comparing things or equating products with accomplishment. Buy what you can afford and what you need, and be happy with it. There is absolutely no correlation with sensor size and penis size, no correlation with EXPEED version number and IQ, not even any strong correlation between camera owned and paycheck size. Heck, some pro photographers don't make much money but own the best camera ;~).
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.